IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dhcwg] Failover: poolreq message secondary-only?

Ted Lemon <mellon@nominum.com> Fri, 02 November 2001 22:36 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA20603 for <dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 17:36:30 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id RAA02775 for dhcwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 17:36:32 -0500 (EST)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA02653; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 17:31:22 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA02630 for <dhcwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 17:31:20 -0500 (EST)
Received: from toccata.fugue.com (toccata.fugue.com [204.152.186.142]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA20495 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 17:31:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from green.bisbee.fugue.com (205-140-116-229.ip.theriver.com [205.140.116.229]) by toccata.fugue.com (8.11.3/8.6.11) with ESMTP id fA2MTrv17229; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 14:29:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 205-140-116-229.ip.theriver.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by green.bisbee.fugue.com (8.10.2/8.6.11) with ESMTP id fA2MVul02106; Fri, 2 Nov 2001 15:31:56 -0700 (MST)
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 15:31:56 -0700
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Failover: poolreq message secondary-only?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v472)
Cc: dhcwg@ietf.org
To: steve@relicore.com
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <000301c163e9$64361400$3500000a@relicore.com>
Message-Id: <6C1C7EEE-CFE1-11D5-979F-00039317663C@nominum.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.472)
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: dhcwg-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> Leases should belong to either the primary or the backup,
> regardless of their status ( free, active, abandoned...).
>
> This would be conceptually much cleaner.

Good heavens, that wasn't what I was proposing at all.   That would require 
a complete rewrite of the spec, which is out of the question.   I'm just 
asking for the restriction that only the secondary can send poolreq, and 
the primary send poolresp, be removed.


_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
dhcwg@ietf.org
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status